for flouting hospital 'no sibling' rule for ebf baby?

[StarlightMcKenzie]

DS had an operation yesterday. He needed me to be there. Breastfed baby also needed me.

I took my Aunt to look after my ds and we were sent initially to a waiting room. The plan was for her to keep him there and for me to pop out of the ward to feed him.

However, we were there for half an hour and my ds started to ask for a feed, so I started to bf. Literally 2 sucks in, we were called. I pulled him off and he screamed so I jigged him about (which quietens him as a distraction) and moved towards the ward with him in tow.

The nurse told me he wasn't allowed. I told her that I needed to finish his feed and then I would take him back to my aunt. I offered to vrubg ds ub 10 mins but she got arsey saying that ds would have to have his operation cancelled if he missed his slpt. Nurse started tutting about him disturbing the other patients and that there was a strict no-sibling rule that I knew about as it was in the letter (it was).

so WIBU?

Helen I agree that if you have a child who has S.N, it is very easy for combat to become the default position. It is exhausting, and it isn't pleasant as some posters have pointed out with a passive-aggressive "are you okay" headtilt

I am judged for having a child over three drinking from a bottle, breastfeeding, not sleeping through, using a pushchair, not being bought a meal they wouldn't eat in a restaurant, screaming in shops, being in a supermarket trolley, being on reins like a dog, having vaccinations which damaged them delayed as well as for me being a scrounger carer every day.

So the combat-mode isn't just because you have to fight for a diagnosis, for support, for help to meet the extra costs, for the right school, for a statement - it's because you are continually having to defend yourself as well. Sometimes it gets so wearing that the choice is to battle or to give up completely.

I would much rather be parented by a loving and responsive mother like the O.P than the woman I could easily see myself becoming.

Uppermid, sorry but she did, and I have read the whole thread.
The whole BF against all odds, with a child that was weaning (though all previous posts withdrawn) is making me back away slowly.
I don't know wtf is going on here TBH.
.com

Sorry being a it dim LadyB but she did what?!

A bit dim I meant, fat fingers too by the looks of it!

This thread makes my head hurt

She didn't specifically say it uppermid, and I didn't say she did. It was just the vibe I got from reading her posts. They were all putting breastfeeding on a pedestal and acting incredulous when anyone suggested breastfeeding just might have to come second, or find a compromised solution to something else.

I didn't actually make a judgement one way or the other on that. I made a judgement on her attitude and how she chose to present herself.

Well you and others read something into it that I didn't. I still think its very unfair, your projecting your thoughts, maybe that's how you feel but to imply that's what star was doing is wrong. And mnhq obviously feel the same.

The OP hasn't been putting bf on a pedestal at all. I too am baffled about how anybody can read that into this thread, except for the fact that everybody is making up their own ideas of what the thread is about and the misunderstanding is being perpetuated. This thread has turned into a game of Chinese Whispers. I feel quite sorry for the OP although I doubt she needs my pity. I reckon she is strong enough to deal with all this.

The thread in a nutshell is about a mother who was torn between dealing with a baby who had just started a feed and who, having just woken up, wasn't in the mood to be placated (and many babies would be the same, breast or bottle fed) and having to do what a nurse wanted for the sake of her other child. The easy way to avoid all this was for the OP to take her feeding baby with her, do what she had to do for her other child and then hand back the baby to her aunt who was there for the specific purposes of looking after the baby. The only reason the bf is relevant is because the OP couldn't hand the baby to the aunt immediately to continue the feed as she might with a bottle fed child. The nurse didn't take into account the actual situation, decided that rules were rules which shouldn't be broken (neglecting tot take into account hospital policy on bf though) and instead made it difficult for the OP to do what she needed to do. She wasn't even thinking of her patient - how is his mother supposed to concentrate on the patient when she knows she has an angry distressed baby, possibly upsetting a waiting room full of people and his great aunt who even with a pouch or a rcie cake or a 10 course bloody banquet would have been powerless to placate him. Instead of focussing on her son waiting for an operation she was probably wondering when she could get away to bf the other one. Better all round just to have quietly finished the feed without all the fuss whilst sitting with the child waiting for the operation. That eventually happened. It shouldn't have had to turn into a battle though.

And really going back and looking at old posts to see if the baby was really weaned? Have you nothing better to do? It is all irrelevant. Really some of you are projecting way too much into this and have decided to play amateur dectective or psychologist or whatever nonsense. Why?!

But Star is a well known poster Big who often posts in a pedestal / evangelical way about bf and posts lots about health care professionals etc. Links have been made because of this.

I agree - take this thread as a stand alone then it appears as not unreasonable. Put into the mix repeated arguments / previous posts about her baby eating solids etc then it becomes more unreasonable. Some threads and posts are more memorable than others. I don't usually remember posters but i do with this one because she's hit a few nerves for me.

From what I understand by this thread the child isn't exclusively breastfed so therefore the heading could be said to be misleading. As perhaps a different answer would be given for a child who is being weaned and can have other food or drink.

I 'know' Starlight too. We have both been here a very long time and I have had a couple of run-ins with her myself (I have also agreed with her too to be fair). I don't like evangelical/crusading bfing threads either. Having bf both my own well past a year each but having broken some of the 'rules' along the way to achieve that it annoys me to be told I have been doing it wrong. I also don't like those who make a show of bf to show they can and should be able to feed anywhere at anytime. I don't believe that helps anybody but that is a whole other thread and not something to get into now. Just making the point I know evangalising when I see it.

However, this thread isn't anything like that. The baby is 7mths old. He is barely weaned and no matter how much he can and does eat, breastmilk is still his main source of nuturition and comfort and what he would be looking for after a nap. He started to feed and had it taken away. As far as I am concerned that it is all that is relevant for this particular situation. I know from experience you can't do that to a baby and get away with it! They don't like it very much. Was Starlight unreasonable to want to finish the feed despite being told that she couldn't because apparently the baby took up too much room. No she isn't in my opinion and to try and find other reasons for her wanting to feed her crying baby seem a bit lame to me. She didn't really have the option.

The thread title might be a bit misleading in the sense that other food has passed his lips at least once before but as he is only 7 mths and can do without it, whilst he can't do without milk, I would let it pass. I think people are just narked that Starlight didn't cave in as soon as some people piled on to say how unreasonable she was and that is when they started to try and trip her up. Sad really.

But she was unreasonable. And behaved even more unreasonably when people disagreed with her.

She wasn't unreasonable, in fact she remained calm, patient and dignified throughout. Unlike some other posters

She insisted repeatedly that her baby could subsist on nothing but breast milk - no arguments here that it's a main source of nutrition until 12 months - but stated repeatedly that giving him anything else to tide him over was impossible as he was barely taking solids. Several other posts elsewhere contradicted this completely (and I didn't look for them due to an excess of free time - I was on those same threads and could remember them) which, as far as I'm concerned, completely undermines any argument she may have had as she's using questionable means to try and drive home her point and make herself appear to be the aggrieved party. Whether I agree with whether she was BU or not, she completely undermined any sympathy she may have been seeking by using fervent justifications which were not entirely, or even remotely, consistent, then back pedalling furiously with bizarre explanations of these inconsistencies when they were highlighted.

I guess I mostly think she should have been allowed to go in unhindered with a BFing baby, but her blatantly apparent sense of entitlement justified by prevarication is what triggered the negative reactions from so many of us.

Most of my clients who don't use private services for children with disabilities or SN in perticular ASD tend to end up in battles constantly with health care professionals,social workers and educational staff

Just to get there children the very basics that those without disabled kids take for granted.

HE'D ALREADY STARTED ON THE BOOB. A RICE CAKE WOULDN'T HAVE PLACATED HIM. NEITHER WOULD AN ELLA'S POUCH, OR A BANANA, PASTA, 5 COURSE DINNER OR A CUDDLE.

AND YES IM AWARE I'M SHOUTING!!!

Please read my last post uppermid. It's her method which irked me (and others), probably more than the situation itself.

AND THE WORLD ENDS BECAUSE HE HAD STARTED-I THINK NOT.

COUNTLESS BABIES HAVE DISRUPTED FEEDS FREQUENTLY. IT WAS A ONE OFF.

I CAN SHOUT TOO!

My 1st biscuit, how exciting!

What method? She took her aunt with her to stay with the baby off the ward, the timing didn't work cos surprise surprise they baby's routine didn't fit in with the hospitals. She didn't kick up a stink, there was one nurse who said she couldn't take the baby but ended up reluctantly letting her when she could see that the baby needed the mum. She also said that a bottle fed baby who would only take the bottle from mum would have had the same problem and would have needed to go with her, so no bf agenda there.

If star was rude to anyone it's because she was repeatedly provoked

No one said it was the end of the world, but don't you to think that it was a stressful enough situation as it was without adding a screaming baby to the mix?

I really don't get the venom shown to star over such a small thing. She's had her words completely twisted to fit other people's agendas. She been called a liar and another poster further up thread had it right, it's been like Chinese whispers on here.

There can be very good reasons for getting old posts deleted, or NC'ing and having your old posts swapped to your new name. Grammatical errors or posting while drink aren't what I would call 'good reasons'.

Exactly Elphaba.

This is the weirdest thread ever.
I wish I'd never given my POV I must have been pissed.
My last comment, I really can't engage with anybody that can get all their previous posts withdrawn.
And I love the NHS and if you're going to knock it, please have a real reason, IMO a weaned BF baby is not one of them.
.

Uppermid Her method in trying to justify her position on this forum - not her method in dealing with the situation.